Newark's Fourth Shooting of Year Sends Boy,14, to Hospital

The teen was found bleeding on the sidewalk on Cherry Street about 3:30 p.m. Thursday. Police say the shooting may be gang-related.

say a 14-year-old boy is expected to survive what may have been a gang-related shooting on Cherry Street Thursday.

This is Newark’s fourth shooting of 2011.

Police Sgt. Mike Carroll did not give the boy's exact condition but said he is stable.

Carroll said the police department first received calls about the shooting on Cherry Street, between Dairy and George avenues, shortly before 3:30 p.m.

Cherry Street neighbors said they heard several gunshots, then saw the boy bleeding on the sidewalk.

“Cherry Street is a busy thoroughfare,” Carroll said. “You have an elementary school nearby. kids walk down Cherry to go home.”

Graham Elementary School is located about 0.6 miles from the shooting scene. Newark Junior High is less than a mile away.

Commander Tom Milner said investigators believe the boy was affiliated with a gang.

“I’m going to be straight with you. We believe this is gang violence,” Milner said. “We’re not sure what specific gang. We are working with the evidence, canvassing the neighborhood. We will bring an end to this senseless violence.”

The victim was a Newark resident who attended Newark Junior High sporadically, says neighbors.

The shooting investigation prompted officers to close off Cherry Street between Dairy and George avenues for about two hours. Neighbors who were at home at the time of the shooting were not allowed to leave during that time.

One man who identified himself as Ed said he heard six to seven gunshots at the time of the shooting. He said he called 9-1-1 after he saw the boy tucked under a white Chevy Suburban.

“I didn’t think I would hear gunshots like that in Newark,” Ed said. “I just moved from East Palo Alto.”

Another neighbor, Sergio Cervantes, said he heard the gunshots from the back of his house. He also saw the boy on the ground.

“He look worried, scared,” Cervantes said. “It looks like he was shot in the leg. I hope he’s OK.”

Cervantes said he has known the teen for about year.

“He seemed like a normal kid," he said.

Cervantes said he has never seen a shooting like this in his neighborhood.

“I’m worried out here. I have a daughter. I want to keep her safe,” he added.

If you have any information on the shooting, you may call the Newark Street Enforcement Team's Detective Sergeant Mapes at 510-578-4734. You may also leave information anonymously on the “silent witness” hotline at 510-578-4965.

Newark officers have responded to four shootings since the beginning of the year:

  • On Feb. 23, someone shot an 18-year-old man in the legs at a housing complex on Cedar Boulevard near Lido Court. You may read more about the incident here.
  • On Jan. 29, a man was shot several times in an alley behind  on Newark Boulevard. For more on that incident, click
  • On Jan. 20, someone shot a 19-year-old man as he was driving by Haley Street and Cedar Boulevard. You may read more about that incident .
Nadja Adolf July 19, 2011 at 11:21 PM
What benefits? Reviewing back to the 1970s, all I see is bending over backwards to help developers and businesses make quick bucks at the expense of the long term livability of the city. Is there something I've missed? Oh, and he is partially responsible for school issues. Every time he promotes Redevelopment, which adds more children to the schools while not adding commensurately to the school property tax funding. When he and the Council sat there and were questioned about adding these so-called "new neighborhoods" children to the schools - and the Mayor and Council decided it wasn't an issue because California law required the schools to accept the new students even if the district lacked facilities or funding for them. Mona, the city officials DO NOT deserve a pass on this one. T
Nadja Adolf July 19, 2011 at 11:24 PM
Mona, I don't ignore laws. But I don't advocate passing feel good laws that don't help solve the problem. We have more than 20,000 gun laws on the books in the US - the vast majority passed since the late 1960s - and it hasn't slowed the criminals down one silly millisecond. Guns don't kill - people kill. If you take a look at our homicides in town, our criminals have demonstrated that they can do a great job of committing grisly murders without firearms - stabbing seems to be very popular. People have been committing murder since Cain slew Abel - and I think it is time we quit blaming the firearms and start looking at the real causes of homicide.
Nadja Adolf July 19, 2011 at 11:26 PM
Pete - This discussion board already exists, and has existed for several years on Yahoo. It is a yahoo group called SustainableNewark. Come on over and join in. Remember, young computer professionals and executive types don't do much Facebook because of the security risks.
Nadja Adolf July 19, 2011 at 11:30 PM
Yes he would. We've been issued two skunks this year and animal control doesn't do skunks or raccoons. When we had a large, aggressive stray dog show up we wound with several police officers with a bean bag shot gun, a dart gun, rifles, and more in our yard. Animal Control showed up rather late on the scene.
Nadja Adolf July 19, 2011 at 11:32 PM
Tiger Lady - the Mayor and City Council didn't make cuts to many portions of the city budget - they only made cuts to the portions that they thought would get votes for Measure U. Ask about how many hundreds of thousands of dollars were being wasted on assorted consultants (and how many of those were no-bid contracts) while the city was busy seeing a "budget crisis" for crossing guards and parks. While parks were being shut down and crossing guards elminated, they went out and bought a golf course mower because they were/are still planning to build a golf course we can't afford.
Nadja Adolf July 19, 2011 at 11:34 PM
A lot of the younger generation doesn't win prizes, either. Just look at Mr. Grindall and Ms. Apodaca.
Mona Taplin July 20, 2011 at 12:05 AM
Nadja, of course you don't want threats made against you nor your property vandalized,-and I despise things like that happening to you or anyone else too. Actions like that go way beyond disgusting. If I lived near anyone to whom those things were happening I would do everything possible to help protect you. Everyone who knows me can tell you I would be sitting outside as often as possible with my phone and my camera. It's just totally senseless to attack someone because they don't happen to agree with what they think.
Mona Taplin July 20, 2011 at 12:14 AM
Nadja, one man in particular moved to Newark in order to run for city council here in order to give himself a leg up politically.Our city at the time had extra money,- hiring instead of firing police and firemen,- etc. People take advantage of the circumstances when things are going great and tear our leaders apart verbally when the economy sinks.
Mona Taplin July 20, 2011 at 12:36 AM
Tiger Lady-Then why don't you stop slamming my old school views and run for office and prove how much smarter you are than the rest of us Erika? Perhaps you have forgotten it was we old fogies who worked our heads off to get schools built? Fought for good educational programs including music and arts? Yes, many have gone down the drain now but that has nothing to do with my old school views.
Nadja Adolf July 20, 2011 at 06:51 AM
Mona Taplin responded to my comments on how many of the people I had hoped would run for Council instead left the city because they thought that the decline to being a slum was past the point where it could be stopped with the following: "Nadja, one man in particular moved to Newark in order to run for city council here in order to give himself a leg up politically." Mona, this doesn't negate what I was saying. He had no interest in serving the people of Newark, just in helping himself. Our entire council has demonstrated no interest in serving the people of Newark - only in building pet projects and enriching developers. In fact, your response PROVES my point. Newark is known to be so corrupt that it is seen as the ideal place to launch yourself in politics. Mona also wrote: "Our city at the time had extra money,- hiring instead of firing police and firemen,- etc. People take advantage of the circumstances when things are going great and tear our leaders apart verbally when the economy sinks." No, Mona, many of us were attending council meetings and were gravely concerned at decisions made at that time. The council and mayor spent on pet projects as if the boom would last forever, and were busy attempting to create a $100 million dollar debt for Redevelopment. Plans were drawn up for the Silliman Center and a golf course ballot measure was proposed and passed. The reserve was drained. And it all hit the fan when the boom ended.
Nadja Adolf July 20, 2011 at 06:53 AM
A big fat curfew during school hours and after 9PM. Passes or accompanying parent required for exceptions. A medical appointment card would serve as a pass.
Nadja Adolf July 20, 2011 at 06:55 AM
Run, Julie, Run. I hear there are two opening on the school board next year. Consider it.
Mona Taplin July 20, 2011 at 03:13 PM
Nadja, you forgot to mention that the reserves were there in the first place because the City Council under David Smith was prudent in investing and spending city funds. Yes there were many people who were against the decisions being made,- but there were also a great many people,- including me,- who were in favor of them, thinking this would be good for Newark in the long run. As for people you tried to persuade to run for office who preferred to move instead, we are much better off without them because it's very obvious they weren't interested in doing anything for this city. You say they thought this city was becoming a slum and beyond the point of redemption,- but one man took advantage of the excellent state our city was in for his own personal gain. Well, our city has come a very far way from the time i first moved here and low income housing was about all that was available. That attracted my family, being far from wealthy, for a home to buy. It most certainly isn't even close to slum like today and I give credit for that to a very large extent to David Smith's tenure as Mayor here, as well as to people like Clark Redeker who has served this city so well for so many, many years. I thank all of them for making this city a good place to live in.
Nadja Adolf July 20, 2011 at 09:00 PM
Mona, the prudence ended the minute the reserves were squandered on a new toy, the Silliman Center. It is the "finest aquatic center west of Denver" - and the only one in a small town that isn't large enough to support it. The man who moved here moved on as soon as he made a few allies by promoting one group against another and spending tax dollars to provide goodies that encouraged votes for him in the future - and since he was moving on almost immediately, he didn't concern himself about how those programs and expenses would be funded over the long haul. Perhaps you need to start reading the City Council minutes? Lower middle class and working class neighborhoods are not the same thing as "low income housing" where the residents and/or the developers are subsidized. Mona, you delude yourself if you think it isn't "even close to slum like today" because the schools are failed, we have more murders than East Palo Alto - a city where new development often consists of more subsidized housing - and we have more home invasions per capita than Oakland! People left because they were interested in doing something for this city - but they decided that they couldn't sacrifice their children's opportunities to try and fight an entrenched, intermeshed old guard. They left because they decided their children needed to attend schools that would prepare them for the future and they didn't have the money for private education.
Mona Taplin July 20, 2011 at 10:30 PM
Nadja, the fact that I don't agree with you doesn't mean I don't know what's going on in City council meetings. FYI, the "working class housing" when I came here was working class poor considerably more than middle class. Working class poor who worked hard to build new schools including our first high school where the Jr high is now. Working class poor who were willing to tax ourselves more to benefit our children back when taxes were already outrageously high. I think that the Silliman center is one of the best things that happened to Newark. You think the direct opposite. A lot of us who have lived in Newark for years and have been a part of how this little city has grown and prospered appreciate how things have been done, while a good many "Johnny come latelys" want entirely different things. We remember when we had to go to Hayward to shop for everything except groceries,- and we remember how welcome the Fremont Hub shopping center was when it came into being. We remember "experts" telling us that it wasn't feasable to have a shopping center in Newark because it would be doomed to failure before it started. I think they were wrong. These tough economic times have a whole lot more to do with the problems we are facing today than any decisions made by our city Councils. We have been thru this before in recessions, and managed to slowly but surely come back and begain prospering again. I know it can be done again. Not easily, but certainly.
Mona Taplin July 20, 2011 at 11:10 PM
To continue Nadja, so far I haven't heard anything from the complainers about what they would do in the future to help us begin to prosper again. the Silliman center is here whether anyone likes it or not and can't be tossed away. That expensive lawn mower that some claimed to be illegal to use in california and actually has been used all along can't be sent back whether we like it or not. Money was spent by the school district on surveys that many of us didn't like, but we can't get that money back. Now let's hear what will be expected from candidates that do run exactly what changes should be made. No more mud slinging into the past, because that won't solve a single issue. With huge cutbacks coming our way to both city and school district coffers, what should be done to improve situations? I've heard we should sell property owned by the school district. Which property, and are there legal restrictions on how that money can be spent? (I already know the answer to that one) Can we reasonably expect a sale of property fast enough to give our schools the help they need? We can throw stones from now till eternity on what's done in the past, but what matters is what's done in the days to come. We can learn from both good and bad experiences, Let's hear what you want and how wants would be funded for school and/or city affairs. Anyone who does run for office in Newark better have very broad shouldres to carry all the complaints on because it will be a thankless job!
Mona Taplin July 21, 2011 at 09:45 AM
True, there are people who can't afford to use the Silliman Center. Does that mean we all should go without? There are people waiting for up to an hour to get into the pool area during the summer so apparently there are a lot of people who can use the center.There are lots of people during these tough times who can't afford to go out for dinner either. Maybe we shouldn't allow restaurants to open either?
Nick July 21, 2011 at 05:00 PM
Is there some way where we can turn the Silliman Center into a facility like the Boys and Girls Club, except for people of all ages. I'm not saying change the physical state of the facility, but what I'm saying is more from a funding standpoint. I know that the Boys and Girls Clubs inquire about donations from the private sector, whether from citizens or corporations.
Mona Taplin July 21, 2011 at 05:33 PM
Nick, I also am in favor of finding a way to fund the facility so that more people of all ages can enjoy it., I think there is a need especially for children in the summer who need good things to do in supervised activities.
Nadja Adolf July 22, 2011 at 06:34 AM
I think that would be an excellent idea; it would also get back to the original idea of the Silliman Center, which was supposed to be to provide a place for the youth to go and do things other than hang out on the streets. How it morphed into a health club for affluent residents of neighboring cities is something I have never understood.
Nadja Adolf July 22, 2011 at 06:36 AM
Subsidizing an elaborate facility that is to expensive for the residents really sticks in my craw because I don't see why people are taxed to provide a recreation space that they can't use. I don't ask the city of Alameda to subsidize the Oakland Yacht Club, where I keep my little 23' trailerable sailboat - because I recognize that I am participating in a comparatively expensive sport and should pay my own marina fees.
Mona Taplin July 22, 2011 at 03:10 PM
Nick, if you use the Silliman Center then you know it isn't a health club for people from other cities, and that a great number of us living in Newark enjoy the facility. There's something for everyone there. There are people living in every city including Newark who find it difficult to go to the grocery store and buy food too, which is why charity organizations are so prevalent. Newark does have some families of all ages who can't afford to go to Silliman, just as Fremont has families of all ages who can't afford to use their wonderful new recreation center. I would like to see our facility made more available to people of lower income by contributions from businesses and citizens like us, and that's what I am going to work for.
Nick July 22, 2011 at 04:51 PM
Mona, I do use the facility. I have seen the game room, the basketball court, the swim center, thus my thought is that we should do something similar to the Boys and Girls Club and seek donations from major corporations. I would go farther and state in outgoing letters that all donations would be kept to activities for kids under 18, game rooms, summer programs, basketball leagues, camps, swimming camp. My major idea is to ween it away from having tax dollars being spent on the upkeep of it and maintain programs.
Mona Taplin July 22, 2011 at 05:20 PM
Nick, I love your ideas and will strongly back them. I doubt if we will ever see a time when no tax dollars are needed,- but without a question of doubt we can do better with fewer tax dollars. Certainly during the summer and after school we can improve what we already have by asking corporations and we citizens to contribute to activities for our kids. We have parks big enough to allow a great supervised picnic and game day for kids at no charge to them. We could close the Silliman center occassionally for kids only activities at very low cost or no cost to them,- and/or set aside times during every month when special events could be held for them. We can do better for people of all ages, but I am especially concerned with finding great things that kids can enjoy to keep them from just running the streets or grouping up in shopping centers with the resulting problems. I know for certain we have thousands of great kids in this city that need adults to point them in a better direction. We already do have a lot going for us in these directions, but we can and should do better. I don't mean by passing the buck to the school district and City council,- I mean by all adults standing up and helping the best way we can. I am partially handicapped these days, but my mouth still runs and I can still write letters and make phone calls. I am going to do everything I can to help bring these things about. Thank you for caring Nick. Newark needs more people like you.
Nadja Adolf July 23, 2011 at 07:43 AM
We tried to organize Neighborhood Watch some years ago. The woman who ran it was out on maternity leave - and no one got back to us. In the interim a goodly number of those who wanted the program left the area because the crime had become too high in our neighborhood and the police, with the exception of one Lt. and a street crimes officer - didn't seem very interested in dealing with the drug houses. When we finally had people who might be interested again, the city had run out of money.
Nadja Adolf July 23, 2011 at 07:50 AM
Mona, you aren't reading what I am writing - you are distorting what I say. When I contrast the hard working poor and lower middle class that built Newark with the modern tenants of subsidized housing, you try and conflate the two groups. Working class poor are not the same as the career criminals, unwed mothers with large families, and unmarried couples with children who depend on Section 8 and other subsidies to provide for their families. I think the Silliman Center COULD have been one of the best things to happen to Newark - if it had been built as originally envisioned - primarily a small town recreation center and pool. It is too expensive and too inaccessible for Newark families. The decisions made by the City Council left Newark unprepared for tough times. They spent money as if there was no tomorrow during the boom years and never worried about how they would pay the debts if the economy cycled. This time there is a good chance it won't come back because the city government keeps making more and more decisions that make the town less and less attractive to families. Why live in Newark when you can live in Gilroy or Tracy and have better schools? Why live in a Newark "transit centered development" of unattractive, over crowded townhouses on asphalt pavement to ride the bus to work when in Gilroy or Tracy you can catch a real train to work?
Nadja Adolf July 23, 2011 at 07:56 AM
Mona, pointing out government failures is not mudslinging, no matter how much one disagrees with what is said. The first thing to do is to stop subsidizing new developments on the theory that they will attract tax dollars because it hasn't worked in the past, and it isn't going to work now. The second thing to do is to recognize that the city subsidizes the Chamber of Commerce, which should be trying to promote Newark instead of simply rubberstamping every tax proposal from City Hall. The Chamber should advertise Newark in the small local shoppers and papers across the Bay - and have pictures of residential neighborhoods - NOT THE LAKE. (The Lake is NOT high end housing and is NOT perceived as such in PA or MP or MV. Better to show some of the other areas and extol the large lots, convenient freeway access, and lower housing prices.) The schools. We should apply for waivers to toss all sorts of junk overboard. We don't need to spend time on ethnic pride or DARE which has been shown to actually increase drug use. Ethnic history should be integrated into US history and not isolated to Chicano Week or Black History Month. A heavy focus should be on how all different groups built this country. There are many great examples - Mountain Men Jim Beckwourth and Kit Carson did a great deal of traveling in California - one Black, one White.
Nadja Adolf July 23, 2011 at 08:01 AM
School funding - I know the district is underfunded - but they seem to overpay for their administrators compared to districts of comparable size, such as Dublin. Enrollment is also shrinking, and should shrink farther this fall as more and more parents of Schilling and Graham students realize that they can now transfer out of district. I don't think the schools are salvageable with money until we replace the marjority on the school board. One start for income would be to make the various organizations that are allegedly "renting" district property actually pay their rents. LOV, for example, apparently quit paying quite some time ago. Activities for youth are critical - but we need a curfew rule that actually fines the parents. I am often astounded at how many juveniles I find wandering the area between my house and the Middle School after midnight. Youth only activity is one thing - but I'd like to see hours for families to come with their kids. It is really important for the kids to have their parents acting as role models. Oh, and I'm NOT running for office. Did it once; that was more than enough for me.
Mona Taplin July 24, 2011 at 06:21 PM
This is why I am a little reluctant to vote for you Rick. You exaggerate the things I've said about the good in this city and concentrate only on pot holes. I'm sure you have good ideas,- but why not concentrate on them instead of all the criticism? We need a good, strong, well paid police force including animal control officers. We DO have animal problems in this city, some of which we can't do a whole lot about because of state and/or federal laws. We used to trap wild animals (Raccoons, possoms, skunks, etc) and the animal control officer would pick them up. They can't do that anymore because we don't have enough officers. These animals go yard to yard by digging under fences. County Vector control won't help unless EVERY homeowner in the neighborhood digs down under their fences and installs mesh screen so the animals can't dig under. Is it possible to fine those people who feed those "cute" wild animals? They are the people causing a lot of the problems. I like Nadja's idea of a curfew. My daughter had a curfew set by her parents. She didn't like it very well,- but like it or not if she wasn't home on time we went looking for her, and we expected to find her where she said she was going to be,- or else. We didn't wait for the police to send her home. Curfews have been tried, but parents hate to have them enforced on their little dumplings.Like it or not, it's time to get tough on things like that.
Mona Taplin July 24, 2011 at 06:29 PM
I fail tos see how the Mayor and City Council can be responsible for kids having guns in their back packs. That's a parents responsibility, and it's about time parents were charged with criminal neglect when their kids commit crimes with weapons, whether those weapons be baseball bats, guns or knives. There are laws concerning this, but they are rarely enforced. Time to get tough.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something